Alcohol Use Too Socially Acceptable

By Tina Phillips

April 14th, 2011

Previously published in The Pioneer 

Why is drinking so socially acceptable?

Alcohol is treated as if it is not a drug and has no negative consequences. Almost every social situation seems to involve alcohol. How many parties are thrown without alcohol being served? How many people go out after work or on a weekend and do not drink? What holiday is celebrated without wine, champagne, or a cocktail of some sort? From happy hour, to fundraisers, to weddings, or any celebration, alcohol is involved every step of the way.

As a non-drinker, I can attest to how awkward it is to go to social gatherings that surround alcohol. Everyone is throwing drinks back while you drink soda or iced tea. Everyone starts to act different as their inhibitions wane, while you remain sober. It is an exclusionary feeling and leads many people to feel pressured to drink. Most people who go to a place where alcohol is being served are even literally pressured to drink by the people around them. They are teased and embarrassed if they do not join in. Many people who drink act like there is something wrong with a person who chooses not to partake. Often people do not just drink one or two drinks but drink to get intoxicated and/or binge drink. This culture of drinking is a huge problem.

The World Health Organization says alcohol abuse is the third leading cause of death and disability in the world. Alcohol is a leading cause of death among youth. Three hundred twenty thousand people between the ages of 15 and 29 die yearly from alcohol-related causes. Many of these deaths are caused by drunk driving.

Not to mention the health impacts of alcohol such as alcohol poisoning, cirrhosis of the liver, and fetal alcohol syndrome and related disorders. Moreover, the risk of sexual assault, being robbed, getting sexually transmitted diseases, getting into physical fights, etc. goes up when people are under the influence. Furthermore, some become abusive of or chemically dependent on alcohol and this can cause many issues for the individual as well as their family. If one is going to drink, one should know the risks and how to reduce their risk of harming themselves and others.

Ways to reduce harm from alcohol are varied. These strategies include: making sure you have a designated driver with you who remains sober, setting a limit of the number of drinks you plan to consume before you start, spacing drinks out (one drink per hour), alternating drinking alcohol with drinking a non-alcoholic drink, eating something before you drink alcohol, avoiding doing shots, not mixing alcohol with prescription medications that have warnings not to on the label, and not mixing alcohol with caffeine, among others.

It is also important to know the signs of alcohol poisoning such as: vomiting, confusion, slow or irregular breathing, seizures, low body temperature, paleness of skin and passing out. A person with these kinds of symptoms needs to seek medical attention immediately. The only way to be completely safe is to not drink at all. If one is going to drink it is recommended they stay within the low-risk drinking guidelines, which means no more than two standard drinks per day, or nine standard drinks a week for women and fourteen for men.

In the long run though, the social acceptance of alcohol in our society has overall negative impacts on us. What keeps alcohol socially acceptable? The alcohol lobby ensures that alcohol stays at current regulation levels and is not more heavily regulated by putting money into politician’s pockets via donations. The lobby has ensured that alcohol can be advertised on TV, magazines and on billboards. Alcohol is marketed and targeted to poorer communities and to ethnic minority communities. For instance, there are more liquor stores in poor and ethnic minority neighborhoods. Alcohol is a $35 billion-a-year industry in the United States. Look no further than profit as the reason why our school is debating whether to serve alcohol on campus. Given the serious consequences that alcohol poses, especially to young college aged people, serving alcohol on campus should not even be an option considered.

Alcohol is portrayed by the media as fun and relaxing. We are told that alcohol is less harmful and less serious than the illegal drugs, but research proves this is not true. Alcohol is responsible for more deaths than any other drug besides cigarettes. Cigarettes in recent years have become heavily regulated and are becoming less socially acceptable as they are banned from restaurants and even public streets and parks. Yet alcohol remains one of the most dangerous, yet acceptable drugs around.

We need to make alcohol less socially acceptable. This will help stop the peer pressure to consume it during almost every occasion or social gathering. Every social gathering should not be centered on alcohol. As a society we need to create awareness about the dangers of alcohol, promote safety and harm reduction around it, and end the myth that alcohol is harmless “fun” and should be used to “relax.” Alcohol is often used as a “social lubricant” for shy people to become more outgoing in social situations. We need to create better and healthier ways for people to achieve the same goal. In addition, we need to reduce stress that leads to people turning to alcohol to relax. That means changing the way we live, work, and play. If our society was less capitalistic and allowed for less working hours, all jobs paid a living wage, jobs had more flexible schedules, and people had more free time to relax in healthier ways, then less people would feel the need to turn to alcohol. If we want people to make healthier decisions we have to be willing to sacrifice for it. As long as well allow the alcohol lobby to keep pushing alcoholic beverages into our hands and we accept the myths about alcohol we will continue to see the grave outcomes.

Is Obama a Socialist?

Is Obama a Socialist?

by Tina Phillips

March 12, 2011

Previously published in The Pioneer

Some say our president is a socialist. However, President Obama is no socialist. Believe me; I would know, since I am one. No matter how much some may believe he is a socialist, his actions prove otherwise.

Take his recent budget proposal, for instance. He made suggestions to cut non-defense spending, mostly social programs such as higher education and heating assistance for those that need it during a cold winter. A socialist would actually do the opposite. A socialist would cut the defense budget and use the leftover money to fund social programs. By making that proposal, not only did Obama prove himself not to be a socialist, he went against his own Democratic Party agenda and promises he made to the American people.

Another promise President Obama made was to give the American people a “public option” for healthcare. A socialist would have fought for single-payer universal socialized healthcare—making the insurance companies obsolete, since healthcare should be for healing people, not making money off of people’s suffering. Obama did not even come through with the public option, let alone single-payer.

In addition, recently, President Obama gave into Republican demands to keep the Bush-era tax cuts for the rich intact for another year, even during one of the worst recessions ever. We could use that money in better ways, such as to fund education and programs that would help people get back to work. Instead, it goes into another rich man’s pocket. Socialists believe in redistribution of wealth and on a grand scale—we do not propose the rich pay three percent more—more like 50% more. We believe that we as a people should take care of each other and protect the social good—not dismantle it.

Some say Obama has shifted to the right in order to be moderate and work with the new Republican majority in Congress. How does it make any sense then to start all negotiations by giving in to right-wing tactics, such as austerity, right away? The Democrats fail miserably at just their basic level of principles and platform, let alone standing up for socialism. The ironic thing is what we need more than ever is socialism! Just do not count on Democrats to provide it.

There are alternative policies that the Democrats are choosing to ignore. The answer to reactionary policies is progressive policies. Right now most U.S. corporations and foreign corporations that do business in the U.S. avoid paying any income taxes although they are racking in record profits. These corporations are being given huge subsidies and benefiting from tax loopholes. The wealthy are being given tax breaks instead of paying their fair share. Billions of dollars has been spent on needless wars. Millions of dollars are spent on locking up non-violent people who are addicted to substances and the continued war on drugs that criminalizes people who need rehabilitation. If we want to look at where the revenue could come from, to fund a better life for all Americans, look no further than above.

Meanwhile, the unemployment rate is still around 9 percent. That does not even count the underemployed or those who have given up looking for work because their prospects appear hopeless. People are losing their homes and becoming homeless. The use of alcohol and other substances is going up because of the stress people are under. Thus the cycle and culture of poverty continues on growing ever larger, taking down what people used to think of as the “middle class” but what has always been the working class… now becoming the underclass. There is more wealth concentrated in the hands of the few rich than ever before. The top 10 percent now possess 80 percent of all financial assets and the bottom 90 percent holds only 20 percent of all financial wealth.

As the owners gain more, the working class’s wages remain stagnant and prices go up. The working class is being exploited more and more. This is no temporary condition either; this is a direct by-product of capitalism. We have long ago been priced out of the façade known as the “American Dream,” and now we are being kept from even surviving. It is time for real “change we can believe in,” Mr. Obama. Maybe what we need to do is “take our country back,” from the likes of you.

The truth is the Democrats are as much of capitalists as the Republicans. Democrats no more serve working class interests than Republicans. They are controlled by their corporate masters who fund their campaigns and who make sure their agenda is pushed through above the American people’s agenda. Socialists propose that people own and control the means of production and democratically lead through cooperatives in their workplaces and in their local communities. Socialists believe in full employment for all those who want to work and a living wage. Socialists believe in a radical democracy free from control and interference from corporations or tyrants.

As long as America is going the way of capitalism, we are doomed to plutocracy and oligarchy—rule by a small number of rich people. There is a solution above and beyond compromising to the point of oblivion that we see from the likes of President Obama and the Democrats. We should look at what recently took place in Egypt and what is now taking place in Wisconsin to see that peaceful and powerful revolution is possible. As people wake up to the onslaught of attacks against us, we must organize to fight for truly progressive and ethical policies. We, the people, have the power to overthrow our masters and my hope is along the way we take another look at an alternative to capitalism—socialism, and this time see it for what it really is-- a good thing.

Embracing the Paradox: Fat and Healthy

Embracing the Paradox: Fat and Healthy by Tina Phillips

February 17, 2011

Previously published The Pioneer

If America truly wants to promote health, it should stop focusing on weight management. How many of us hear the message “lose weight” everywhere we go, whether it is on TV, in a magazine, or even at the doctor’s office? We are told to “go on a diet,” “restrict your calorie intake,” and “exercise more.” We are told if we want to be healthy and live a long life, we better get thin.

However, there have been studies that show that losing weight does not necessarily correlate to a longer life. In fact, there is no study that has ever proven that. Furthermore, dieting can lead to major health consequences.

Diets do not work for many reasons. One reason is because when a person restricts calories their metabolism slows down and they can go into starvation mode—where the body resists energy depletion. A person who diets and loses weight is likely to gain the weight back, and in many cases more weight than before. Doing this over and over—a repeat process of losing and gaining is what is called “yo-yo dieting.” Yo-yo dieting causes long term health problems. Some people may say that people only gain the weight back because they give up on the diet and go back to eating the way they did before and if they would just stick with it they would lose all the weight and keep it off forever. Even those who can remain on diets will often gain weight back because weight has more to do with biology and genetics than people would like to admit. Science tells us that people’s natural weight is in our genes. So we should not fight against our natural inclinations since it is usually futile and counter-productive.

Moreover, weight loss aids—such as pills, powders, surgeries etc.—are actually damaging to one’s health. The diet, cosmetic, fitness, fashion, and pharmaceutical industries make a ton of money off of people who are convinced by shrewd marketing they must lose weight to be healthy. Focusing and obsessing about food, exercise, and weight loss all the time is not healthy either. It can lead to eating disorders. It can also cause guilt, shame, and self-hate— which can prompt people to punish themselves for “cheating” on their diet or telling themselves they are a “fat slob” because they did not exercise today. Self-esteem suffers for the never-ending quest for the American beauty ideal—thinness. This ideal cannot be obtained by most people and people should not be expected to either.

Fat people are told they are ugly, lazy, stupid, and undisciplined. They are discriminated against in our society, passed over for jobs, told they are not attractive and could never get a date, and looked down upon in our culture. They are told constantly there is something wrong with them and that they are inadequate. The number one reason children are bullied and teased is their weight. Weight is one of the last acceptable reasons for people to hate another because a person is judged based on the concept that “fat is just not healthy.” There are many studies on both sides of this debate but one thing is clear—many do whatever it takes to lose weight and they still cannot do it and keep it off long term. So why should they be punished by society? Why should they continue to punish themselves? Fat bias, sizeism, and fat phobia leads to direct consequences for most people and seeing as more and more Americans are being labeled as “overweight”—that is likely you and I.

There must be a paradigm shift in terms of people’s attitudes towards weight in our society if we are ever going to become a more healthy country. People must accept and love themselves unconditionally the way they are at any given moment. This means accepting that our bodies are beautiful the way they are and that we are not “bad” for being a different shape or size than anyone else. People just naturally come in different body forms—and that is okay!

In addition, the focus should be placed on health and not weight loss. Health comes in all sizes! The prescription for true health includes: eating healthy food that makes you feel good, listening to your body’s natural cues for hunger and fullness, and getting your body moving in ways that make sense to you, is fun, and enjoyable—like taking a walk with a friend or going out dancing. Do this in an effort to be healthier and feel better, not to lose weight.

This is part of new way of thinking about these issues and is called Health at Every Size (HAES). It was developed by Dr. Linda Bacon, a nutrition professor at City College of San Francisco. A clinical trial showed that the HAES approach proved statistically significant in increasing health—such as lowering blood pressure, while at the same time increasing participant’s body image concept and self-esteem in comparison to the calorie restrictive diet method. In both cases no one in the study lost weight and kept it off long term, but one group improved their health both body and mind—and that was with the Health at Every Size method.

In order for this paradigm shift to take place, people are going to have to change the way they live. This shift will take the support of our government, work places, schools, and community. As a society we need to slow down, work less, and have more free or low cost access to healthy food and modes to exercise. As long as healthy food costs too much money, is not in our local stores, our communities do not have farmer’s markets or spaces and places to exercise, and our pace of life and work demands remain so high, our society cannot be healthy. Our well-being suffers when we are stressed out and time crunched—the convenience and affordability of fast food, microwaves, and crashing on our couch after a long day at work becomes inevitable. Exhausted people do not feel like exercising or making a healthy slow cooked meal. It is time we changed the way we do business in this country so people can devote time and energy in self-care and true health.

We need to end the war on fat people and reject dangerous myths about beauty, weight, and health. We must begin a new way of life of self-acceptance and self-love, slower pace, and a higher quality life filled with abundance of good food and physical activity. It is time to stop blaming people for failing to meet an impossible standard and give people the opportunities they need to live more healthy lives. Only then will we be able to become a happy and healthy society.

Think Before You Speak

Think Before You Speak By Tina Phillips

February 11, 2011

Previously published in The Pioneer 

I have heard the word “lifestyle” used with increased frequency lately. I have heard it used to describe a “healthy” lifestyle, a “bohemian” lifestyle, or a “hip hop” lifestyle. It is difficult for me to understand exactly what that is supposed to mean. I suppose “lifestyle” means a way of life. I do not much care for the term because it can be vague and pigeonholes people. Furthermore, what I really question is why the term “lifestyle” is applied to the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community?

As a gay person when I hear someone refer to my life, sexual identity, and sexuality as a “lifestyle,” “lifestyle choice,” "alternative lifestyle," or as a “choice,” it makes me cringe. Another term that I reject is “sexual preference”—which also denotes that there is a choice involved or like I just prefer one thing over another. I strongly feel that I was born gay—although sexuality can also be fluid throughout one’s life and shift and change. I advocate accepting wherever someone is at any given moment in their life.

There are many biological studies indicating that sexuality is not a choice. When someone refers to who I am as being a “lifestyle,” it denotes that I chose to be this way when in fact I did not. Many young people are now coming out at age 10-12, way before they could actually make a conscious choice to be LGBT. Also many LGBT people recognize themselves as non-heterosexual as early as 5 years old, when they look back on their lives.

If you think about it… LGBT people face such discrimination and rejection from people in society that it makes no sense that being gay would be a choice one would choose. Would you choose to be ridiculed, isolated, called names, teased, bullied, beat up, hated, made to feel disgusting, kicked out of your house and rejected by your own parents and family? Would you choose to be a target of hate crimes, sexual assault, and murder and be at an increased risk for depression, anxiety, self-harm and suicide? I doubt it. Not that being LGBT is a death sentence—most LGBT people grow up to live wonderful lives but that does not mean we do not still struggle with discrimination and stigma (which needs to be combated).

Besides that, most people want to fit in to society. Wanting to fit in is just one example of why being LGBT as a young person is extremely difficult and often times is very painful for a young person to admit to themselves they are non-heterosexual, let alone come out to anyone else. There is a lot of fear surrounding this issue because no one wants to be rejected, feel different, and looked down on.

So that gets back to my original point. When someone refers to the life of a LGBT person as a “lifestyle” or a “choice” it demeans LGBT people. For example would anyone who is heterosexual refer to their heterosexuality as a “lifestyle choice” or even a “lifestyle”? Of course not! It becomes apparent that the label of “lifestyle” is not an accurate description but really a misnomer. It is applied to the LGBT community to further marginalize LGBT people and make being non-heterosexual appear taboo.

Being LGBT is intrinsic to who one is and encompasses many complex things about one’s life. It is not just about sexuality it is about culture, love, relationships, and family too. We often times fall in love with the same sex and can have long term commitments with people of the same-sex – start families together and raise children. We deserve validation and respect for who we are.

It is important that people are validated in their sexuality and affirmed. Doing so helps to raise their self-confidence and self-acceptance. If a person feels accepted by others they are more likely to accept themselves and grow to have a positive self-concept and image. Using words like “lifestyle,” “choice” and “preference” disempower LGBT people and make them feel inferior to heterosexual people. I have heard teachers at this very school use that term to refer to gay people. I have heard it in the media, and I have even read it in assigned reading. It is unacceptable.

Using these terms is a subtle cue that you are not accepting of gay people. I hope for the sake of the young people and others you encounter, you would choose not to use these words because of the negative impact and effect it has on others’ self-concept. Unfortunately many people use those terms so it is easy to them pick up from our society and the media. That is why we all have to work hard to be conscious of what is coming out of our mouths and think before we say things that could have a negative impact on others.

Recently there has been much talk in the media about suicides mostly by LGBT young people who were bullied for being LGBT or because they were perceived as LGBT just because they did not conform to gender norms. It is very sad and it is an outrage. We need to do everything we can to prevent things like this from happening.

So what I am asking is if you can make a commitment to not use the terms “lifestyle,” “choice,” or “preference” to describe LGBT people, to reject it when you see it used in text books etc., and confront others who use those terms so they know that those terms are not okay to use.

Could you imagine what a LGBT young person must go through on a daily basis? When everyone they know uses those terms and worse, if you were to use them too they will just reinforce the idea that there is something wrong with them. Try to encourage those around you to accept who they are by using words that make them feel good about themselves. I prefer sexual identity, sexuality, or sexual orientation as good words to use. We can all do our part to encourage the safety and mental health of our community.